To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
3 results ✕ Clear filters

Institutional Portfolio Flows and International Investments

Review of Financial Studies 2008 21(2), 937-971
[Using a new technique, and weekly data for 25 countries from 1994 to 1998, we analyze the relationship between institutional cross-border portfolio flows, and domestic and foreign equity returns. In emerging markets, institutional flows forecast statistically indistinguishable movements in country closed-end fund NAV returns and price returns. In contrast, closed-end fund flows forecast price returns, but not NAV returns. Furthermore, institutional flows display trend-following (trend-reversing) behavior in response to symmetric (asymmetric) movements in NAV and price returns. The results suggest that institutional cross-border flows are linked to fundamentals, while closed-end fund flows are a source of price pressure in the short run.]

Institutional Portfolio Flows and International Investments

Review of Financial Studies 2008 21(2), 937-971
Using a new technique, and weekly data for 25 countries from 1994 to 1998, we analyze the relationship between institutional cross-border portfolio flows, and domestic and foreign equity returns. In emerging markets, institutional flows forecast statistically indistinguishable movements in country closed-end fund NAV returns and price returns. In contrast, closed-end fund flows forecast price returns, but not NAV returns. Furthermore, institutional flows display trend-following (trend-reversing) behavior in response to symmetric (asymmetric) movements in NAV and price returns. The results suggest that institutional cross-border flows are linked to fundamentals, while closed-end fund flows are a source of price pressure in the short run.

Competition Links and Stock Returns

Review of Financial Studies 2022 35(9), 4300-4340
Abstract This paper demonstrates that value-relevant information about a firm appearing in regulatory disclosures of other firms is overlooked by investors. Firms highly mentioned in the 10-K competition section of other firms tend to outperform with risk-adjusted returns of up to 9% annually. Outperformance is concentrated in firms whose competition references are made in the context of targeting rather than admiration. Consistent with investor inattention, abnormal returns stem from cross-sector competition mentions as well as firms with low-analyst coverage. Moreover, highly mentioned firms exhibit improved fundamentals in subsequent years, further signifying they are underpriced.